Re: Codification - To Pangea

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Daystar Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Pangea to Frosty - futher continued ( on May 11, 2004 at 12:38:03:

In Reply to: Codification - To Pangea posted by Frosty on May 11, 2004 at 08:09:40:

The REAL ISSUE in this debate is NOT about what science has to say about origins. Science has abundant evidence to support its conclusions even IF that evidence is ignored or rejected by the creationist community. The REAL ISSUE is whether or not one interprets Genesis as a prosaic, spiritually oriented account of origins or a documentary-like, history of origins.

The FACT that millions of Bible-believing Christians have no problem fitting the ToE into their spiritual beliefs should, at some point, become significant to the creationist camp. The fact that most of these believers see "the hand of God" directing evolution via mutation and natural selection in undetectable ways is certainly at variance with the atheistic view. But, IMHO, it is not at variance with a theistic view of evolutionary origins.

As I have tried to point out numerous times, even the most ardent creationist/fundamentalist Christian is forced by spiritual conflicts to interpret Genesis as well as other significant passages of the Bible. So the fact that the Bible needs interpretation to make sense should not be in question. The salient point: Is the theistic evolutionary interpretation of Genesis worthy of consideration or not? And if not, why? IMHO, creationists have decided to focus their "worship" on the message rather than on the messenger.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup


Subject: Re: Re: Codification - To Pangea


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Daystar Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]